We had both `repo()` and `mut_repo()` on `Transaction` and I think it
was easy to get confused and think that the former returned a
`&ReadonlyRepo` but both of them actually return a reference to
`MutableRepo` (the latter obviously returns a mutable reference). I
hope that renaming to the more idiomatic `repo_mut()` will help
clarify.
We could instead have renamed them to `mut_repo()` and
`mut_repo_mut()` but that seemed unnecessarily long. It would better
match the `mut_repo` variables we typically use, though.
- use a single commit instead of an array of them. This simplifies the
implementation. A higher level api can wrap this when an array of
commits is desired and those semantics are figured out.
- since this API is directly 1-1 on parents, there are no conflicts
- if we introduce a higher level API that handles lists of commits, we
may need to restore the conflict/resolved distinction, but for now
simplify
This addresses the test instability. The underlying problem still exists, but
it's unlikely to trigger user-facing issues because of that. A repo instance
won't be reused after gc() call.
Fixes#3537
Apparently, these gc() invocations rely on that the previous "git gc" packed
all refs so there are no loose refs to compare mtimes. If there were new (or
remaining) loose refs, mtime comparison could fail. I also added +1sec to
effectively turn off the keep_newer option, which isn't important in these
tests.
With my jj repo, the number of jj/keep refs went down from 87887 to 27733.
The .git directory size is halved, but we'll need to clean up extra and index
files to save disk space. "git gc --prune=now && jj debug reindex" passed, so
the repo wouldn't be corrupted.
#12
